RONB vs. AMUB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RONB (Baron First Principles ETF) and AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) are both exchange-traded funds - RONB is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Baron Capital, while AMUB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index. RONB is actively managed, while AMUB is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. RONB charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for AMUB.

Performance

RONB vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Baron First Principles ETF (RONB) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RONB achieves a -6.63% return, which is significantly lower than AMUB's 14.01% return.

RONB

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: -6.63%
• 6M: -8.36%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMUB

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: -7.94%
• YTD: 14.01%
• 6M: 13.63%
• 1Y: 13.10%
• 3Y*: 15.44%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 2.79%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RONB vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RONB Baron First Principles ETF	-6.63%	-0.76%
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B	14.01%	-0.93%

Correlation

The correlation between RONB and AMUB is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2025	-0.19

Return for Risk

RONB vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RONB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

AMUB

AMUB Risk / Return Rank: 27
AMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
AMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
AMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 26
AMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
AMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 26

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

RONB vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron First Principles ETF (RONB) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	RONB	AMUB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.96	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.40	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.17	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.24	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	3.36	—

Drawdowns

RONB vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RONB drawdown since its inception was -13.08%, smaller than the maximum AMUB drawdown of -79.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RONB and AMUB.

Drawdown Indicators

	RONB	AMUB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.08%	-79.46%	+66.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-10.69%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.22%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.58%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-78.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.26%	-8.53%	-1.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.19%	-29.11%	+22.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.92%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RONB	AMUB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.28%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.09%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.43%	13.85%	+6.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.43%	20.12%	+0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.43%	27.13%	-6.70%

RONB vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

RONB has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than AMUB's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

RONB vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison

Neither RONB nor AMUB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RONB and AMUB in my portfolio?

RONB and AMUB have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RONB or AMUB?

On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RONB or AMUB?

AMUB is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for RONB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RONB or AMUB?

RONB and AMUB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between RONB and AMUB?

RONB is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while AMUB is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and UBS. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for RONB and 0.80% for AMUB.